Cases from cite.case.law:

CHUBB INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY a a s o v. STOYANOVICH,, 121 So. 3d 607 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . We reverse, finding that the trial court misread Gill, which expressly stated that section 771.01, Florida . . . Accordingly, section 771.01, Florida Statutes (2009), does not bar Chubb Indemnity’s claims for negligence . . .

STEWART PARK AND RESERVE COALITION, INCORPORATED SPARC s v. E. SLATER, R. J. R. H., 358 F. Supp. 2d 83 (N.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . . § 771.01, et seq., design procedure manuals and other governmental monograms with regard to the Project . . . Defendants reviewed the modified Project, as required by FHWA’s regulations located at 23 C.F.R. § 771.01 . . .

DAVIS, Jr. v. HILTON,, 780 So. 2d 974 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . . • The clear language of Florida Statutes § 771.01 abolishes the claim of alienation of affections. . . . There is no Florida case creating an exception to § 771.01 for a cause of action for alienation of affections . . .

L. STONE, v. WALL,, 734 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1999)

. . . and the other jurisdictions that have abolished cause of actions for alienation of affections, see § 771.01 . . . See ch. 23138, § 1 Laws of Florida (1945) (now codified at section 771.01, Florida Statutes (1997)); . . .

HOFFMAN, v. Dr. W. BOYD,, 698 So. 2d 346 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . written contracts attached to the complaint clearly fit within the legislative prohibition of sections 771.01 . . . Section 771.01 provides: The rights of action heretofore existing to recover sums of money as damage . . .

SANCHEZ, v. GREAT WESTERN BANK,, 675 So. 2d 250 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . . §§ 771.01, 771.08, Fla. Stat. (1995). . . .

WILDEY, v. A. SPRINGS, III,, 840 F. Supp. 1259 (N.D. Ill. 1994)

. . . . § 771.01. . . .

S. SCHILLER, v. MILLER,, 621 So. 2d 481 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . 320 So.2d 415 (Fla. 4th DCA1975), we recognized that the Florida “Heart Balm” statute, now section 771.01 . . .

ARKANSAS BEST CORPORATION, a v. R. PEARLMAN, M. a L. P. a P. P. a ERP a D NM a EWS a W. AMG a MCC a L. I., 688 F. Supp. 976 (D. Del. 1988)

. . . share and all of the outstanding 7% Convertible Subordinated Debentures Due 2011 of Arkansas Best for $771.01 . . .

VILLARS v. PANAMA MACHINERY AND SUPPLY COMPANY, INC., 18 Fla. Supp. 2d 108 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1986)

. . . See Section 771.01, Fla. Stat.; Ponton v. Scarfone, supra; Dowling v. . . .

McDOUGALD, v. L. JENSON,, 786 F.2d 1465 (11th Cir. 1986)

. . . . § 771.01 (West 1964). This statute has been construed broadly by the Florida courts. . . .

DUTTENHOFER, v. D. DUTTENHOFER,, 474 So. 2d 251 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Mims, 305 So.2d 787 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974) (Section 771.01, et seq., Florida Statutes, bars cause of action . . .

HARRINGTON HARRINGTON, v. J. PAGES,, 440 So. 2d 521 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . intentional infliction of emotional distress”, a cause of action which has been expressly barred by Section 771.01 . . . , Florida Statutes (1981): 771.01 Certain tort actions abolished — The rights of action heretofore existing . . .

A. GILL, v. SHIVELY,, 320 So. 2d 415 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

. . . We note that some jurisdictions have held their “Heart Balm” statutes, similar to § 771.01, F.S. 1973 . . .

MIMS, v. MIMS,, 305 So. 2d 787 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)

. . . . § 771.01 et seq., which outlawed damage claims for alienation of affection or breach of contract to . . .

De La PORTILLA, v. De La PORTILLA,, 287 So. 2d 345 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)

. . . . § 771.01 F.S.A. et seq., which abolishes actions for alienation of affections and is a bar to civil . . .

KOLKEY v. GROSSINGER, 195 F.2d 525 (5th Cir. 1952)

. . . . § 771.01, abolishing “the rights of action heretofore existing to recover sums of money as damage for . . .